Accurate duplication of DNA prior to cell division is essential to suppress mutagenesis and tumour development. The high fidelity of eukaryotic DNA replication is due to a combination of accurate incorporation of nucleotides into the nascent DNA strand by DNA polymerases, the recognition and removal of mispaired nucleotides (proofreading) by the exonuclease activity of DNA polymerases δ and ɛ, and post-replication surveillance and repair of newly synthesized DNA by the mismatch repair (MMR) apparatus. While the contribution of defective MMR to neoplasia is well recognized, evidence that faulty DNA polymerase activity is important in cancer development has been limited. We have recently shown that germline POLE and POLD1 exonuclease domain mutations (EDMs) predispose to colorectal cancer (CRC) and, in the latter case, to endometrial cancer (EC). Somatic POLE mutations also occur in 5–10% of sporadic CRCs and underlie a hypermutator, microsatellite-stable molecular phenotype. We hypothesized that sporadic ECs might also acquire somatic POLE and/or POLD1 mutations. Here, we have found that missense POLE EDMs with good evidence of pathogenic effects are present in 7% of a set of 173 endometrial cancers, although POLD1 EDMs are uncommon. The POLE mutations localized to highly conserved residues and were strongly predicted to affect proofreading. Consistent with this, POLE-mutant tumours were hypermutated, with a high frequency of base substitutions, and an especially large relative excess of G:C>T:A transversions. All POLE EDM tumours were microsatellite stable, suggesting that defects in either DNA proofreading or MMR provide alternative mechanisms to achieve genomic instability and tumourigenesis.
Mismatch repair (MMR)-deficiency analysis is increasingly recommended for all endometrial cancers, as it identifies Lynch syndrome patients, and is emerging as a prognostic classifier to guide adjuvant treatment. The aim of this study was to define the optimal approach for MMR-deficiency testing and to clarify discrepancies between microsatellite instability (MSI) analysis and immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis of MMR protein expression. Six hundred ninety- six endometrial cancers were analyzed for MSI (pentaplex panel) and MMR protein expression (IHC). Agreement between methodologies was calculated using Cohen’s Kappa. MLH1 promoter hypermethylation, dinucleotide microsatellite markers and somatic MMR and POLE exonuclease domain (EDM) gene variants (using next-generation/Sanger sequencing) were analyzed in discordant cases. MSI was found in 180 patients. Complete loss of expression of one or more MMR proteins was observed in 196 cases. A PMS2- and MSH6-antibody panel detected all cases with loss of MMR protein expression. The results of MSI and MMR protein expression were concordant in 655/696 cases (kappa = 0.854, P < 0.001). Ambiguous cases (n = 41, 6%) included: subclonal loss of MMR protein expression (n = 18), microsatellite stable or MSI-low cases with loss of MMR protein expression (n = 20), and MSI-low or MSI-high cases with retained MMR protein expression (n = 3). Most of these cases could be explained by MLH1 promoter hypermethylation. Five of seven cases with solitary loss of PMS2 or MSH6 protein expression carried somatic gene variants. Two MSI-high cases with retained MMR protein expression carried a POLE-EDM variant. MSI and IHC analysis are highly concordant in endometrial cancer. This holds true for cases with subclonal loss of MMR protein expression. Discordant MMR-proficient/MSI-high cases (<1%), may be explained by POLE-EDM variants.
About Me
David is a clinical scientist fellow and a medical doctor specializing in Oncology at Oxford University.
David is a clinical scientist fellow and a medical doctor specializing in Oncology at Oxford University.